This is a ghost and there are many more where this came from
[Link removed by Moderator] - Status Pending
Statistics: Posted by ghostie — 28 Jan 2011, 10:39
]]>
“...no ghost existed in the real world. They exist in the imaginative world which was created by each one’s aggregate of imagination.
So, Phi, in your hypothesis, ghosts are not noumenal, and are only phenomenal in the sense one experiences them. In “reality” they are epiphenomena of “one’s aggregate of imagination”, by which I assume you are describing that part of our “psyche” Jung called the collective unconsciousness.
Have I got your range so far?
By my experience of this phenomena, “collective” is accurate, in the sense of that groups can experience what they agree was the same “ghost”, “ufo”, “mothman” etc. (my fav term, and theory, is “quantum flux”)
That said, Phi, why return them to normal life? Reminds me of old Freud saying the goal of psychoanalysis was to free one of neuroses so one could enjoy the dry, dusty, grey spirit killing normalcy of the daily grind. Schadenfreude!
On the other side of the aisle, CS Lewis comments, “If you are going to see ghosts, you would do well to believe in them.”
Experientially, let me tell you, don't apply that theory to malevolent demons. That lead to my marriage! Not fun.
To paraphrase Vonnegut and misquote RA Wilson at once, “We tend to experience what we expect, so we must be careful what we expect.”
Shakespeare sez: On the bright side, using those methods, I have developed over thirty years of “believing” in it, a quite interesting relationship with a “pookah” I have named “Glory”. To deny some of the things I ascribe to her would imply I am too insane to live in my brain, and perhaps that I am capable of inducing delusions and/or hallucinations in others, so, mostly, I don't talk about her. I do wonder where I would have gotten, by now, if I had initially developed a different theory, like aliens or CIA conspiracy! (Shut-up, Shakespeare)
Very, very interesting account Craig.
Both versions of ghosts can fit with either my soft (morphogenic) or hard (Akashic) versions of my “collective unconscious” theory, but they do seem to pass out of the range of any agreement with Phi..By the way, Phi, I don't recall seeing any of your posts before. Peace
Statistics: Posted by Twain Shakespeare — 17 Oct 2010, 03:33
]]>
My home that I wrote about in Ohio was just a big old farm house as far as we were concerned but within two short weeks I became aware of much more only to have my own discoveries and those made by the rest of the family (including our dogs & cats, believe it or not) verified by various modes of documentation tied to the property as well as independent testimony of people staying as guests in the home, who had absolutely no knowledge of anything tied to the home and its rather curious history.
While this particular property is a matter of personal focus (we lived there, after all) I've done studies on other sites with similar foundations, in the sense of testimony from persons that knew nothing about the location and yet, they report the same exact details. Similarly, I've been tested by psychics seeking to make out that they are friends taking me out for a day of exploration about town, actually test me (and others) by taking them to certain sites about town in order to get their reactions about each place visited. Nothing is ever alluded to, there is no prior suggestion of any kind of testing or curiosity, nor is anything in way of regional lore discusses that would tie to the day's events. Nonetheless, every case in which a truly gifted sensitive was involved (my self included) very accurate details were offered with details matching within a 90%+ ratio with things... oft times matching actual known historic accounts of the property... and before you go there, NO I didn't nor do I believe some of the others that were tested, accessed local archives to check things out prior to the day out... we're talking about random visits to different places and it would prove rather difficult for anyone to simply memorize it all and be prepared; especially when it comes to the unpublished elements.
I have to say that there are two key forms of "Ghost"; those that exist as a kind of "imprint" in time... a recording that repeats a set sequence over and over again. Then you have "Sentient" Ghosts in which you can actually communicate... albeit exceptionally rare, they tend to "haunt" family members or seek to complete a specific task before they can rest... even solving their own murder in a few cases (or so it would seem).
Yes, a large amount of what people call a "Haunting" is little other than imagination. This is especially true for those that know only late 20th/early 21st century existence vs. the more quiet and rural atmosphere the world has known for centuries prior. Our minds are too used to "noise" and when we find ourselves in semi-silence and especially in a voluminous room in the dark... well, the mind will start transforming every little sound or glint of light into something fantastic. It's kind of like eating certain fungi or eating a unique variety of stamp, sugar cube, etc. you only need a simple thought that can trigger a long chain of "experiences."
Statistics: Posted by Craig Browning — 13 Oct 2010, 20:34
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>